The collection of taxes was under the governors of provinces assisted by delegates of the Intendant-General. It was directly effected by the Barangay headman each of whom was supposed to answer for fifty families, the individuals of which were spoken of as his sácopes. His eldest son was recognised as his chief assistant, and he, like his father, was exempt from the tribute or capitation tax.
The office was hereditary, and was not usually desired, but like the post of sheriff in an English county it had to be accepted nolens volens.
No doubt a great deal of latitude was allowed to the Barangay Chiefs in order that they might collect the tax, and the stick was often in requisition. In fact the chiefs had to pay the tax somehow, and it is not surprising that they took steps to oblige their sácopes to pay.
I, however, in my fourteen years’ experience, never came across such a case as that mentioned by Worcester, p. 295, where he states that in consequence of a deficiency of $7000, forty-four headmen of Siquijor were seized and exiled, their lands, houses and cattle confiscated, and those dependent on them left to shift for themselves. The amount owing by each headman was under $160 Mexican, equal to $80 gold, and it would not take much in the way of lands, houses, and cattle to pay off this sum. However, it is true that Siquijor is a poor island. But on page 284 he maintains that the inhabitants of Siquijor had plenty of money to back their fighting-cocks, and paid but little attention to the rule limiting each man’s bet on one fight to $50. From this we may infer that they could find money to bet with, but not to pay their taxes.
Collection of Taxes.
Natives of the gorgeous East very commonly require a little persuasion to make them pay their taxes, and I have read of American millionaires who, in the absence of this system, could not be got to pay at all. Not many years ago, there was an enquiry as to certain practices resorted to by native tax-collectors in British India to induce the poor Indian to pay up; anybody who is curious to know the particulars can hunt them up in the Blue Books—they are unsuitable for publication.
In Egypt, up to 1887, or thereabouts, the “courbash”[1] was in use for this purpose. I quote from a speech by Lord Cromer delivered about that time (’Lord Cromer,’ by H. D. Traill): “The courbash used to be very frequently employed for two main objects, viz.: the collection of taxes, and the extortion of evidence. I think I may say with confidence that the use of the courbash as a general practice in connection either with collection of taxes or the extortion of evidence has ceased.”
But we need not go so far East for examples of collecting taxes by means of the stick. The headmen of the village communities in Russia freely apply the lash to recalcitrant defaulters.
It would seem, therefore, that the Spaniards erred in company with many other nations. It was by no means an invention of theirs, and it will be remembered that some of our early kings used to persuade the Jews to pay up by drawing their teeth.